Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Full Day's HansardDownload Full Day's Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Thursday, 12 May 1921


Senator PRATTEN (NEW SOUTH WALES) . - When the Committee rejected the application of the Army Act to our Australian Forces in time of peace, I understood that consequential amendments would be made in the Bill, and that practically all reference to the Army Act would be excluded.


Senator Pearce - No. The Army Act still applies to our Forces in time of war. All consequential amendments are being made.


Senator PRATTEN (NEW SOUTH WALES) - Under existing legislation the Army Act still applies to our Australian Forces in time of war. That is the reason why I believed that all reference to the Army Act in the Bill would be eliminated consequent upon the rejection by this Committee of a provision under which that Act would have been applicable to our Forces in time of peace.


Senator Pearce - The Defence Act modifies the application of the Army Act. In those modifications certain faults have been discovered, and this is one of them. The clause is intended to rectify a fault which has been discovered in the Army Act by means of a modification of the Defence Act in time of war.


Senator PRATTEN (NEW SOUTH WALES) - Still the position is not quite clear. The Army Act in time of war is already applicable to our Australian Forces.


Senator Pearce - Not as a whole. It is modified by certain sections in our Defence Act.


Senator PRATTEN (NEW SOUTH WALES) - Then this clause seeks to further modify our Defence Act in order to facilitate the application of the Army Act to our Forces in time of war. Is that the position t


Senator PEARCE - Yes.


Senator PRATTEN (NEW SOUTH WALES) - I am satisfied with that explanation.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 56 agreed to.

Clause 57 (Forfeiture of pay, &c).







Suggest corrections